Arch linux

[Wicked411]

Well is it worth my time using arch. I want something new and have the joy of putting some work in it. But I am worried about hardware. How hard is it to make everything work and make it good?? Maybe make a distro. Would be fun. Mind you I am only 15. What do you think? Thanks :)

[LaRoza]

Well is it worth my time using arch. I want something new and have the joy of putting some work in it. But I am worried about hardware. How hard is it to make everything work and make it good?? Maybe make a distro. Would be fun. Mind you I am only 15. What do you think? Thanks :)

See the Arch forum here.

[Barrucadu]

It is pretty fun. The only thing I had troubles with was my wireless card, which was recognised automagically in Ubuntu but not Arch.

[ynnhoj]

if you go ahead and install arch, i'm sure you'll find that it's really not that difficult. read through the install guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_Arch_Linux_Install_Guide) to get an idea of what is involved.

[will1911a1]

Arch isn't that tough, you just have to be willing to read and spend the time looking for the answers you need.

It's actually a lot of fun.

[mips]

You might learn something from the following new arch user:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=767749
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=758724

Everyone has this impression that Arch is *really hard* which it is not. If you can read & follow the Beginners & Official install wiki you will be fine. You might even be dissapointed because it is so *easy*

If you like KDE then rather install KDEmod.

[finferflu]

if you go ahead and install arch, i'm sure you'll find that it's really not that difficult. read through the install guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_Arch_Linux_Install_Guide) to get an idea of what is involved.
I would actually suggest the Beginners Guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners_Guide) instead.

[chucky chuckaluck]

i'm proof that it's not hard (and the impression that arch is hard, i think, comes from all the warnings and the tone of the arch beginner's manual. anyway, 'hard' is relative). there are various options along the way of installing of taking the automatic route instead of the manual route (i generally chose the automatic ones). there's just more detail to attend to, and you can get more in depth if you wish.

[mips]

i'm proof that it's not hard (and the impression that arch is hard, i think, comes from all the warnings and the tone of the arch beginner's manual. anyway, 'hard' is relative). there are various options along the way of installing of taking the automatic route instead of the manual route (i generally chose the automatic ones). there's just more detail to attend to, and you can get more in depth if you wish.

I hope you don't mind me using you as a reference in post#6 of this thread ;)

[chucky chuckaluck]

I hope you don't mind me using you as a reference in post#6 of this thread ;)

not at all.

[BarfBag]

Arch is definitely worth the time. I'm back to running Ubuntu now, but it was a great learning experience for me. I highly recommend printing out the Beginner's Guide (linked in a post above) and using that to walk you through installation and configuration.

[Wicked411]

You might learn something from the following new arch user:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=767749
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=758724

Everyone has this impression that Arch is *really hard* which it is not. If you can read & follow the Beginners & Official install wiki you will be fine. You might even be dissapointed because it is so *easy*

If you like KDE then rather install KDEmod.

I like kde..and I have been hearing so many good things about arch so I shall try it right now. Just one thing. The KDEmod, exactly when i start arch can I
do it or do I have to install other things first?

[cardinals_fan]

I'm 14 ;)

I liked Arch a lot. It was fast and fun. The BSD's are working better for me these days though, since the included rum driver actually recognizes my wireless adapter (unlike the wretched rt73usb).

[Masterizaak]

Ok, i installed arch linux and now its asking for a username. I dont remember making a account. So i reinstalled it and now i am on the config screen. What should i do

[Barrucadu]

Do you have the beginners guide on your desk in front of you open on the appropriate page?

[finferflu]

I like kde..and I have been hearing so many good things about arch so I shall try it right now. Just one thing. The KDEmod, exactly when i start arch can I
do it or do I have to install other things first?
Well, you will need to install KDEmod :D
Here (http://kdemod.ath.cx/installation.html) you have step-by-step instructions (they don't cover the whole installation of Arch, they're just for KDEmod).


Ok, i installed arch linux and now its asking for a username. I dont remember making a account. So i reinstalled it and now i am on the config screen. What should i do

I recommend to both of you to read and follow very closely the Beginners Guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners_Guide).

[Wicked411]

I tried arch linux and I failed..Its too difficult for me..:(

[MONODA]

i tried arch, I really liked it at first but i couldnt get my wireless card working (bug in the kernel) so i went to debian. I am finding debian harder than arch actually. arch documentation is really good.

[Wicked411]

Well maybe ill try arch again when I am more experienced

[finferflu]

Did you find it difficult even following the Beginners Guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners_Guide)? :O

[Wicked411]

Haha well only thing that failed me that I for sure know is the internet. it was just to much. :(, the rest was fairly easy..I might try again. I really want to try KDE on arch. Well lets say I install everything fine and dandy no errors. But i mess up the internet cause its all gibberish to my eyes, could I fix in root when it boots. Will it be easier?

[Wicked411]

Arch isnt that hard onces you look around and follow the directions good

[dj_unforgetable]

Would you say Arch is faster/more responsive than your Ubuntu 8.04? What are your specs and what did u install on your Arch machine? I'm interested in finding out if it's any faster, Im choosing between Gentoo and Arch at the moment.

[MONODA]

arch linux is MUCH faster than ubuntu 8.04. Just to give you an idea, a fresh install of arch with no tweaking on my pc will boot in 13 seconds and get to the desktop, that is compared to 50 seconds to desktop on ubuntu 8.04.

[dj_unforgetable]

what de are you using? How is pacman compared to apt-get? how is the package selection? Is it optimized for x86_64?

[Dr Small]

I for one notice a big difference in speed with Arch compared to Ubuntu 7.04. It boots (and shuts down) way faster. Firefox 3 loads it 2 seconds. I am not using a DE, but use IceWM as my WM.

Arch beats Ubuntu by a long shot.
/me needs to install bootchart so he can see his boot time. :)

[Barrucadu]

How is pacman compared to apt-get? how is the package selection? Is it optimized for x86_64?

Pacman for me seems much faster than apt-get, and I have had no problems yet that I haven't caused - such as forcing an installation when there are dependancy problems resulting in orphaned dependancies. Pacman has a really nice feature: optimize. It basically sorts out the database and moves it to a new location on the disk so it can be accessed faster. It doesn't make much of a difference unless you haven't done it for a very long time, but it does speed things up a little - and it reduces hard drive space a bit when done.
There is an x86_64 version available, but I don't know how it compares to the i686 version, as I don't have a 64 bit processor to play with.

[-gabe-noob-]

arch linux is MUCH faster than ubuntu 8.04. Just to give you an idea, a fresh install of arch with no tweaking on my pc will boot in 13 seconds and get to the desktop, that is compared to 50 seconds to desktop on ubuntu 8.04.



THIS IS WHAT I WANT

what DE are you using?

[Caraibes]

arch linux is MUCH faster than ubuntu 8.04.
Actually I triple-boot Ubuntu 8.04, Slackware 12.1 and Arch (with Gnome)...
I enjoyed learning while following the beginners guide, and I have now a working Arch/Gnome desktop, with the same apps as my Ubuntu partition. I don't really notice any speed difference between the 3... I would say Ubuntu boots faster than both Arch and Slackware. Then, once in the DE, it seems mostly the same...
Pacman is much faster than apt-get, but that isn't of a major relevance...

I am mostly a Debian user, so I am biased... But after doing all these careful manual install to get Arch up and running the same way an Ubuntu install does "out of the box" I was expecting a "Ferrari"... So it was surprising to see it is mostly the same...

Anyway, I enjoyed the experience, I learned a lot. The guide is well written...

[mips]

Actually I triple-boot Ubuntu 8.04, Slackware 12.1 and Arch (with Gnome)...
I enjoyed learning while following the beginners guide, and I have now a working Arch/Gnome desktop, with the same apps as my Ubuntu partition. I don't really notice any speed difference between the 3... I would say Ubuntu boots faster than both Arch and Slackware. Then, once in the DE, it seems mostly the same...
Pacman is much faster than apt-get, but that isn't of a major relevance...

I am mostly a Debian user, so I am biased... But after doing all these careful manual install to get Arch up and running the same way an Ubuntu install does "out of the box" I was expecting a "Ferrari"... So it was surprising to see it is mostly the same...

Anyway, I enjoyed the experience, I learned a lot. The guide is well written...

What super computer are you using?

[will1911a1]

Actually I triple-boot Ubuntu 8.04, Slackware 12.1 and Arch (with Gnome)...
I enjoyed learning while following the beginners guide, and I have now a working Arch/Gnome desktop, with the same apps as my Ubuntu partition. I don't really notice any speed difference between the 3... I would say Ubuntu boots faster than both Arch and Slackware. Then, once in the DE, it seems mostly the same...
Pacman is much faster than apt-get, but that isn't of a major relevance...

I am mostly a Debian user, so I am biased... But after doing all these careful manual install to get Arch up and running the same way an Ubuntu install does "out of the box" I was expecting a "Ferrari"... So it was surprising to see it is mostly the same...

Anyway, I enjoyed the experience, I learned a lot. The guide is well written...

That certainly hasn't been my experience. Ubuntu 7.10 ran alright, but some apps (gimp) ran incredibly slowly and the computer took forever to reboot (I had a lock up problem).

[Caraibes]

Guys, I am just giving you an honest review of my experience. My PC is not a super computer, have a look:

-MSI motherboard (K9N Neo V3)
-AMD SempronLE 1100
-1 gig of DDR2 ram
-Nvidia 7300SE video card

Ubuntu (really seems to) boot faster than Arch... Later on, I'll find a way to measure each cold boot.

Then, once booted, using it seems mostly the same. Except that I had to read a guide to set up my Arch system, instead of "the easy Debian way"... On each distro, I have a regular Gnome desktop with my favorite apps...

That said, Pacman is definitely faster than apt-get.

FYI I have been using the 32bit versions of both distros.

[Dr Small]

Bootchart will tell you how long it takes to boot from loading the kernel to the last daemon starting. I need to install that for Arch..

[Caraibes]

Ok, I couldn't work my way out with bootchart, but here's the result of both boot, from Grub to GDM: (in seconds)

Ubuntu 8.04=42.56
Arch=35.74

So obviously, I was wrong, Arch is faster...

[Wicked411]

what de are you using? How is pacman compared to apt-get? how is the package selection? Is it optimized for x86_64?

Well I was using KDE and e17. In my opinion I like pacman better, It just feels nicer, I don't really know nothing personal.

[Wicked411]

Would you say Arch is faster/more responsive than your Ubuntu 8.04? What are your specs and what did u install on your Arch machine? I'm interested in finding out if it's any faster, Im choosing between Gentoo and Arch at the moment.

I think arch might run a bit faster then ubuntu but on my computer I didnt see that much of an increase. I have dell computer, dual core, 2.4GHz and a 7300 LE graphics card.

[Rumor]

Last year, before I built the computer I am currently using, i did a very unscientific experiment comparing Ubuntu and Arch. I found Arch to be faster on that setup.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2650283&postcount=138

[MONODA]

THIS IS WHAT I WANT

what DE are you using?
I switch a lot between KDE, gnome, xfce and openbox but boot is always around 13 seconds. (a tip for arch newbies, in the daemons array in rc.conf, put a @ before all the daemons, it will speed up boot)

[Dr Small]

Basically, what does the @ do?
I know it Php it supresses errors.

[MONODA]

@ will make the daemon launch in the background so it doesnt have to wait for the previous one to finsuh loading for it to start loading.

[Dr Small]

Ah, ok. That makes sense. I'll speed up my boot time, if you please! :)
Edit, Just changed it, and Arch booted in 19s from GRUB to XDM, by my own counting.

[chucky chuckaluck]

whoa! 13 seconds to sign in prompt.

[Caraibes]

Well, guys, I must admit the @ trick works well... Thanks !

[sajro]

Well is it worth my time using arch. I want something new and have the joy of putting some work in it. But I am worried about hardware. How hard is it to make everything work and make it good?? Maybe make a distro. Would be fun. Mind you I am only 15. What do you think? Thanks :)

I've got Arch set up quite nicely and I'm only 13. I've gotten it to run very snappily (even w/ Firefox, though it's FF3 from [unstable] so low mem consumption) with 384MB of RAM and it never dips into swap!

It teaches you a lot about Linux. Remember, though, the Wiki is your best friend to avoid a forum reply reading "RTFM!"

[finferflu]

When you use the @ in front of the daemons, just make sure that no daemon depends on another one, else you might get some daemons failing to start.

[Caraibes]

When you use the @ in front of the daemons, just make sure that no daemon depends on another one, else you might get some daemons failing to start.

-what do you think of that:
DAEMONS=(@syslog-ng @network @netfs @crond @alsa @hal @fam @gdm @cups)

[MisfitI38]

-what do you think of that:
DAEMONS=(@syslog-ng @network @netfs @crond @alsa @hal @fam @gdm @cups)

This is fine, except that backgrounding your logger could possibly skip over some log entries during startup since everything is starting in chaotic order.
Not a big deal usually.

[decoherence]

"Ok, i installed arch linux and now its asking for a username. I dont remember making a account."

Do you recall setting a root password?

The username is root.

First thing to do is add a normal user. I haven't got Arch in front of me, but i'm guessing the command to run is 'adduser'

If you want it to be more Ubuntu-like, install sudo and run visudo. It's all in the linked documents, I'm sure.

EDIT:

Wiki is your best friend to avoid a forum reply reading "RTFM!"

Amen! The Arch people REALLY like it when you read the Wiki before asking for personal help. So do we, of course, but we're generally a lot nicer about it!

[Barrucadu]

Amen! The Arch people REALLY like it when you read the Wiki before asking for personal help.
They like it even more if you add the solution to your problem on the wiki - I should really start doing that.

[chucky chuckaluck]

Amen! The Arch people REALLY like it when you read the Wiki before asking for personal help.

they should. it's a great wiki and it's in an easily found place.

[handy]

You can use the ! mark to prevent any daemons you don't want to use from loading & still leave them in place for future reference, rather than deleting them. From the Beginners Guide (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners_Guide#Backgrounding_DAEMONS_on_startup).

DAEMONS=(syslog-ng @iptables @network !netfs !crond @alsa @portmap @transmission @stb-admin @hal @autofs)

[decoherence]

they should. it's a great wiki and it's in an easily found place.

Absolutely! And there is lots of opportunity to contribute for people familiar with the system. Even for those who are not up to the task of writing documentation, much of what's there can be made more clear simply by going over it with an editor's eye, spotting typos, re-wording clumsy sentences (carefully!)

When they say Arch is 'community driven,' they don't joke around.

[Achetar]

Yeah, I have Arch setup on my laptop running e17. It was way easier to get e17 installed on arch than Ubuntu. I am 15 as well. I got it setup last week. I just edited my rc.conf with the @s, so before I say how fast it boots, I will check that.

EDIT: 40 seconds by my count. Much faster than Ubuntu

[handy]

I set up Arch with Gnome initially, then installed Openbox & removed Gnome. I find that virtually everything happens noticeably quicker now that Gnome is gone.

I like Gnome, but I like OB better, & not just for the speed, for the simplicity, you have to set OB up yourself, but once you have figured it out the first time, you understand that it is not hard & then you can save your OB config' files in case of the unexpected disaster.

[finferflu]

I set up Arch with Gnome initially, then installed Openbox & removed Gnome. I find that virtually everything happens noticeably quicker now that Gnome is gone.

I like Gnome, but I like OB better, & not just for the speed, for the simplicity, you have to set OB up yourself, but once you have figured it out the first time, you understand that it is not hard & then you can save your OB config' files in case of the unexpected disaster.
Hah! You're starting to go minimal as well! It's contageous :D

[handy]

Hah! You're starting to go minimal as well! It's contageous :D

I used to rip everything I could out of the Windows OS's that didn't need to be there, even though that was only a small percentage, I even used software (can't remember it's name at the moment?) to rebuilt the XP Pro' .iso, it came down to 300 odd Mb in size - which was a much larger percentage! Made for a cleaner more reliable XP as well, the registry was quite a bit smaller too.

I have run away from all of that stuff over the last 2.5 years or so. I was just so over fixing other people's Windows problems & maintaining systems.

What I like about the Arch minimalist approach is it's simplicity, it makes it so much easier to learn about Linux, & to maintain your own system that has little more than what you need on it, therefore my Openbox over Gnome preference. :)

Yeah, I guess I've always been a minimalist regarding computers, I just had a holiday from it for a while.

It's good to be back! :D

[chucky chuckaluck]

I set up Arch with Gnome initially, then installed Openbox & removed Gnome. I find that virtually everything happens noticeably quicker now that Gnome is gone.

I like Gnome, but I like OB better, & not just for the speed, for the simplicity, you have to set OB up yourself, but once you have figured it out the first time, you understand that it is not hard & then you can save your OB config' files in case of the unexpected disaster.

aside from openbox being faster than gnome, things go faster when you set them up the way you want. we all work differently and part of speed comes from using ourselves in an optimized manner.

[handy]

aside from openbox being faster than gnome, things go faster when you set them up the way you want. we all work differently and part of speed comes from using ourselves in an optimized manner.

I agree with that philosophy...

Having had the experience of effectively setting things up to speedily work at interfering with the efficient functioning of my mind - this could be called abusing myself in an optimized manner!

[Caraibes]

I set up Arch with Gnome initially, then installed Openbox & removed Gnome.
Interesting...
-Do you use PyPanel ?
-If so, how do you autostart it ?
-If not, how do you minimize and maximize windows without any panel ?

Thanks in advance for your OpenBox tips !

[chucky chuckaluck]

Interesting...
-Do you use PyPanel ?
-If so, how do you autostart it ?
-If not, how do you minimize and maximize windows without any panel ?

Thanks in advance for your OpenBox tips !

if you use 'startx' instead of a display manager, you can just put exec pypanel & openbox in your .xinitrc file. i don't know what you would do with a display manager, but you can make a submenu entry in the openbox menu for pypanel (with entries for 'on', the command being simply pypanel, and for 'off', the command being killall pypanel).

[Barrucadu]

To autostart programs in Openbox, make an autostart.sh file in ~/.config/openbox/

[chucky chuckaluck]

To autostart programs in Openbox, make an autostart.sh file in ~/.config/openbox/

i always wondered what that thing was for.

[handy]

Interesting...
-Do you use PyPanel ?
-If so, how do you autostart it ?
-If not, how do you minimize and maximize windows without any panel ?

Thanks in advance for your OpenBox tips !

The following is what I have in ~/.config/openbox/autostart.sh :-

# Programs that will run after Openbox has started

(sleep 1 && pypanel) &
(sleep 1 && conky) &
vidalia &

I need to use sleep 1 second on pypanel & conky when using vidalia, or they won't load.
_________________

Then ~/.xinitrc has this line to start openbox:-

exec openbox-session

You can also install Docker (http://icculus.org/openbox/2/docker/), which allows you to easily open minimized windows, it is also incredibly light on resources.

It's our pleasure to help each other. :-D

[RedSquirrel]

-Do you use PyPanel ?
...
-If not, how do you minimize and maximize windows without any panel?

Do you mean how does one manage applications without a panel?

middle-click on the desktop shows all of the applications you have running in each workspace. You can select them from there. I have a key binding to bring up this menu so that I don't have to reach for the mouse.

You can also press Alt-Tab to switch between applications on a given workspace.
(http://icculus.org/openbox/index.php/Help:DefaultConfiguration)

[fwojciec]

Do you mean how does one manage applications without a panel?

middle-click on the desktop shows all of the applications you have running in each workspace. You can select them from there. I have a key binding to bring up this menu so that I don't have to reach for the mouse.

You can also press Alt-Tab to switch between applications on a given workspace.
(http://icculus.org/openbox/index.php/Help:DefaultConfiguration)

I also prefer OB panelless... Another good trick -- add this to rc.xml (the "Keybindings for window switching" section):

<keybind key="W-Tab">
<action name="NextWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>
<keybind key="W-S-Tab">
<action name="PreviousWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>

This lets me use Win-Tab to switch through applications on all desktops (minimized as well) -- I actually find it more convenient and intuitive than the middle click solution. Alt-Tab still works and lets me switch between the apps on the current workspace.

[handy]

I also prefer OB panelless... Another good trick -- add this to rc.xml (the "Keybindings for window switching" section):

<keybind key="W-Tab">
<action name="NextWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>
<keybind key="W-S-Tab">
<action name="PreviousWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>

This lets me use Win-Tab to switch through applications on all desktops (minimized as well) -- I actually find it more convenient and intuitive than the middle click solution. Alt-Tab still works and lets me switch between the apps on the current workspace.

Docker works similarly as well.

[RedSquirrel]

I also prefer OB panelless... Another good trick ... This lets me use Win-Tab to switch through applications on all desktops (minimized as well) -- I actually find it more convenient and intuitive than the middle click solution. Alt-Tab still works and lets me switch between the apps on the current workspace.

Neat. Thanks for sharing. :)

[dustigroove]

Another good trick -- add this to rc.xml (the "Keybindings for window switching" section):

<keybind key="W-Tab">
<action name="NextWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>
<keybind key="W-S-Tab">
<action name="PreviousWindow">
<allDesktops>yes</allDesktops>
</action>
</keybind>

Just what I was looking for, thanks.

Cheers,